It's not often that one person plays key roles in two -- count 'em, two -- trillion-dollar disasters. Welcome, my friends, to the world of well-connected Democrat Jamie Gorelick.

In 2004, observers were "astonished" to discover that a key member of the 9/11 Commission had a fatal conflict-of-interest. Jamie Gorelick had served as a Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton from 1994 to 1997.

It was later revealed that Gorelick had established a pre-Patriot Act "wall" that prevented the foreign intelligence and criminal investigative communities from collaborating.

Her 1995 memo, entitled "Instructions on Separation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations", stated explicitly that they would "go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation."

At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a memo to headquarters which included the sentence, 'Whatever has happened to this -- someday someone will die -- and wall or not -- the public will not understand why we were not more effective..."

Bill Clinton and Jamie Gorelick. Without their efforts, the World Trade Center would still be standing. He refused to respond to terrorism as a real leader and commander in chief should have responded, and her efforts gave them the opening they needed.

Bush did not appoint her. There were an equal number of Dems and Republicans on the committee. Congressional Dems appointed the Dem members. She was appointed by them to cover up her own incompetence and responsibility for 911. She had absolutely no business on that committee. She should have been interrogated on the other side of the table.

4
posted on 09/10/2011 9:12:17 AM PDT
by chuckee
(To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target.)

Bush 43 did many things that need explanation. Spending too much money, not using the veto pen, not shutting down useless government agencies, trying to be nice to the Dems, and allow the RATS to use him as a punching bag with little response.

5
posted on 09/10/2011 9:12:17 AM PDT
by doug from upland
(Just in case, it has been reserved: www.TheBitchIsBack2012.com)

Movie patrons recall Forrest Gump’s remarkable presence in an amazing succession of notable historical events. Gump’s innocence and simple wisdom amid those times made for a delightful two hours of cinematic escapism. But there is no escaping the damage that would result if President Obama appoints Jamie Gorelick to succeed Robert Mueller as FBI director. Like Gump, Gorelick was present at a remarkable series of recent historical events during the past two decades, but through them all she displayed nothing that could be called either innocent or wise. So let us count the ways in which Gorelick earned the sobriquet “Mistress of Disaster.”

First, there was her tenure as deputy attorney general under Janet Reno during President Clinton’s first term. Reno described Gorelick as Justice’s “chief operating officer” from 1993 to 1997. She was a key Reno adviser during the horrendous events in Waco, Texas, in which David Koresh, 76 of his Branch Davidian followers (including 20 women and children) and four federal agents died in an unbelievably bungled assault intended to end a 50-day siege. The Davidians were immolated in an inferno apparently ignited by pyrotechnic gas grenades used by the government in the assault.

Next came Gorelick’s move to Fannie Mae, where as vice chairwoman from 1997 to 2003 she was paid in excess of $26 million. During her time at Fannie Mae, Enron-style accounting techniques were used to make the government-chartered mortgage corporation appear to be in better financial shape than it was. As a result of the cooked books, Gorelick was paid more than $800,000 in bonuses in 1998. She was among multiple former Democratic operatives then working at Fannie Mae who received substantial additional compensation for their exertions in what later proved to be a $10 billion scandal. Shortly before the scandal became public, Gorelick told Businessweek that Fannie Mae was “managed safely ... Fannie Mae is among the handful of top-quality institutions.” It was also during these years that Fannie Mae began investing heavily in the subprime loans and unsecured mortgage securities that were at the heart of the Great Recession of 2008.

Finally, and most seriously, there is the matter of “Gorelick’s Wall” and 9/11. Gorelick was a member of the 9/11 Commission and became a focus of critical attention during its hearings when it became known that during her DOJ tenure she imposed a policy of radical separation between the FBI and the nation’s intelligence agencies in terrorism investigations. According to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, “Gorelick’s Wall” was a key reason why “we did not know an attack was coming.” By barring such contacts, Ashcroft told the commission, “our agents were isolated by government-imposed walls, handcuffed by government-imposed restrictions, and starved for basic information technology. The old national intelligence system in place on September 11 was destined to fail.” Gorelick refused to resign from the commission despite the obvious conflict of interest.

Gorelick was also a pivotal reason that Marty Frankel was able to embezzle $3 Billion dollars from insurance companies. The FBI in Connecticut had no idea of the money laundering going on the the SE US because of the lack of communication between the different FBI offices. The FBI here in Mississippi had no idea that Frankel was buying and laundering money through Mississippi contacts.

She should be charged with accounting fraud before the statute of limitations is up. 5 years from the end of the crime and she can never be charged. She, Johnson, and Raines were the main players at Freddie/Fannie who cooked the books and brought the world economy to it’s knees.

Their motive was to obtain millions in bonuses. They also wanted to grow mortgages to the poor to expand their progressive utopian agenda. They created investment instruments to raise capital to continue their progressive banking scheme. The taxpayers and future generations will pay trillions. This not only damaged us financially but many of our allies were impacted. How were her actions any different than Ken Lay’s at Enron? I would argue they were worse since she was appointed to a government supported entity and the damage was so widespread.

Her efforts to build firewalls in the intelligence community are well understood by few but were incredibly dangerous. As someone posted above, if you wanted to hide the Clinton-China scandal the best way to do this was to block the FBI and our foreign intelligence services from talking. This indirectly contributed to the intelligence failure of 9/11 costing America trillions. If we ever go to war in Asia, the damage could be even worse.

24
posted on 09/10/2011 9:44:52 AM PDT
by volunbeer
(Keep the dope, we'll make the change in 2012!)

He was asked if it (getting Bin Laden) happened the way he thought it would happen or planned it to happen.

“It did not happen the way we planned it because under Mr Clinton we had no lethal authority. We could not have done this operation against Bin Laden. We were directed either to capture him through a kidnapping or to give the US military to use their air power.”

He said Clinton had TEN specific opportunities to get Bin Laden.

In the best opportunity, when Bin Laden was in the desert meeting with several UAE princes, he said that Clinton, rather than get Bin Laden, contacted one of the princes to warn them because Clinton was in the middle of a deal to sell planes to the UAE-—so, Scheuer said, Clinton chose to sell planes to Arabs rather than get Bin Laden and protect American lives.

Clinton had another opportunity in the third week of May 1998-— an opportunity to kidnap Bin Laden. He cancelled the operation.

Caller asked about Clinton & Bin Laden. Scheuer said the 911 report describes the 10 specific opportunities in detail. Had they been given lethal authority, Bin Laden would have been dead in spring of 99.

PS: Scheuer must have mentioned Clinton dozens of times in the interview and not ONCE did he refer to him as President -— it was always as Clinton or Mr. Clinton. His description of Clinton was scathing. Basically said Clinton never made a decision not based in pure self-interest.

On the recent terror alert, Scheuer said that the one thing the government has not mentioned is how these three terrorists got into the US. It would be terrible if they got through an airport or customs, but it’s going to be worse politically if they got in from Mexico or Canada, where there are no controls in some areas....In terms of our borders, the great majority of our maritime and land borders are completely uncontrolled.”

This interview is well worth listening to if you get an opportunity to read a transcript or catch a repeat of the program.

I cannot tell you how many times I have resented some of this week's media coverage of the 9/11 anniversary, because no one is mentioning the one person that should be implicated in the intelligence community's failure to identify the threat.

PBS broadcast a report this past Tuesday by Rachel Martin who seemed to have no idea about Jamie Gorelick’s actions that strangled the CIA.

Countless others blamed the failure on the Bush people.

I sat listening to the tripe without one mention of this:

“It should be noted that when Gorelick penned the aforementioned memo**(see below), President Clinton was extremely worried about ongoing FBI and CIA investigations into illegal Chinese contributions that had been made to his presidential campaign.

“Both the FBI and the CIA were churning up evidence damaging to the Democratic Party, its fundraisers, the Chinese, and ultimately the Clinton administration itself.”

Think Charlie Trie here.

“It was also a period when the FBI had begun to systematically investigate weapons-technology theft by foreign powers, most notably Russia and China.

“Had FBI agents been able to confirm China's theft of such technology — or its transfer of that technology to nations like Pakistan, Iran and Syria — Clinton would have been forced by law and international treaty to react (and to thereby jeopardize the future flow of Chinese money into his political coffers).”

**In a 1995 memo to then-FBI Director Louis Freeh and U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, titled Instructions on Separation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations, Gorelick wrote the following:

We believe that it is prudent to establish a set of instructions that will more clearly separate the counterintelligence investigation from the more limited, but continued, criminal investigations. These procedures, which go beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.

I cannot tell you how many times I have resented some of this week's media coverage of the 9/11 anniversary, because no one is mentioning the one person that should be implicated in the intelligence community's failure to identify the threat.

PBS broadcast a report this past Tuesday by Rachel Martin who seemed to have no idea about Jamie Gorelick’s actions that strangled the CIA.

Countless others blamed the failure on the Bush people.

I sat listening to the tripe without one mention of this:

“It should be noted that when Gorelick penned the aforementioned memo**(see below), President Clinton was extremely worried about ongoing FBI and CIA investigations into illegal Chinese contributions that had been made to his presidential campaign.

“Both the FBI and the CIA were churning up evidence damaging to the Democratic Party, its fundraisers, the Chinese, and ultimately the Clinton administration itself.”

Think Charlie Trie here.

“It was also a period when the FBI had begun to systematically investigate weapons-technology theft by foreign powers, most notably Russia and China.

“Had FBI agents been able to confirm China's theft of such technology — or its transfer of that technology to nations like Pakistan, Iran and Syria — Clinton would have been forced by law and international treaty to react (and to thereby jeopardize the future flow of Chinese money into his political coffers).”

**In a 1995 memo to then-FBI Director Louis Freeh and U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, titled Instructions on Separation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations, Gorelick wrote the following:

We believe that it is prudent to establish a set of instructions that will more clearly separate the counterintelligence investigation from the more limited, but continued, criminal investigations. These procedures, which go beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.

It's beyond explanation. The whole thing was a farce, from beginning to end. One of the most ironic scenes in modern history was when Jamie Gorelick was grilling Condi Rice. It should have been the other way around. Condi toyed with Gorelick like a cat playing with a mouse. I wish she'd sunk her teeth in, instead of letting her off the hook.

I’m currently reading “Reckless Endangerment” by Morgenson and Rosner. It seems like the authors are making ex-Fannie Mae head James Johnson out to be the biggest ogre in the housing/financial disaster. I haven’t gotten to Gorelick’s role in the fiasco yet.

I talked to Ron Paul on the phone on a talk station the day before the Iowa Caucuses in the last presidential election cycle. After giving him kudos for defending the Constitution, I asked a foreign policy question. If N. Korea was sending a ship to Iran with nuclear tipped missiles, would he board and seize or sink it. His answer told me all I needed to know. He said, paraphrasing, “Why would we do that. It’s not our business.”

47
posted on 09/10/2011 5:01:35 PM PDT
by doug from upland
(Just in case, it has been reserved: www.TheBitchIsBack2012.com)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.